A number of studies have tested economic models of household decision-making, yet there is no consensus regarding which is most appropriate for practical application. One area where the choice of household decision model has potentially important implications is the valuation of child health or safety. Few child health valuation studies have investigated household decision-making models, typically adopting the simplifying unitary model. This study aims to determine the implications of household decision making models on the magnitude of a child safety premium. To achieve this, a stated preference survey is conducted amongst farm households in Northern Ireland to ascertain mothers' and fathers' individual preferences regarding the value of reducing the risk of non-fatal farm accidents to their child relative to themselves. A number of interesting results emerge. Firstly, no significant difference is found between child values elicited from mothers and fathers. Secondly, the premium, which suggests that fathers are willing to pay twice as much for their child than self, is consistent with previous findings. Finally, the affect of different household models on the value of the premium will be investigated. Results show that the premium magnitude varies, with midpoint values of 1.25 from the bargaining model, 1.5 from the collective model and 2 from the unitary model.